In an interesting case, Doctors were saved from paying Rs. 30 lakhs.


“Pyrexia of unknown origin (PUO) is not a Psychiatric disease. "
&
"Referring a patient to a higher center is not a Negligence.



DAUJI DAYAL CHAUHAN V/s. SWARN JAYANTI SAMUDAIK Hospital & ORS.

 Link :
http://cms.nic.in/ncdrcusersWeb/GetJudgement.do?method=GetJudgement&caseidin=0%2F0%2FOP%2F115%2F2002&dtofhearing=2016-03-07

 Facts in brief :
1.The National Commission was dealing with the allegations of the Complainant, that due to initial wrong diagnosis and wrong treatment by the doctors the his Wife, a lawyer by profession, did not improve and succumbed to death. She was initially alleged to be diagnosed as PUO. But day by day, there was no progress and hence she was referred to a Neurologist in Agra, who after CT Scan etc opined it as the case of meningitis. But it was too late to save his wife and hence he filed the case of Rs.30 laks.

2. Doctors and Hospital Version :

All the proper care was taken. The allegations of the Complainant that Pyrexia of unknown origin (PUO) is a Psychiatric disease, have been made with an ulterior motive to extract money. It was also denied that the patient was given any psychiatric treatment.The Patient also concealed previous medication at the time of admission.

Held :
1. The Commission ruled in favour of Doctors. It observed that the patient was treated properly for meningitis, which is also one of the causes of PUO and as per literature, 22 % of PUO cases presented due to infection, meningitis is a type of infection. Therefore, the treatment given by Doctors was for infection, i.e correctly treated.

2.The reliance put by Commission on previous Apex Court judgments may be summarised as, merely because the doctor chooses one course of action in preference to the other one available, he would not be liable if the course of action chosen by him was acceptable to the medical profession.
3. Consumer Protection Act (CPA) should not be a "halter round the neck" of doctors to make them fearful and apprehensive of taking professional decisions at crucial moments to explore possibility of reviving patients hanging between life and death." “Doctors in complicated cases, have to take chance, even if the rate of survival is low.

Here also it was observed that ,"referring a patient to higher center is not a Negligence" .

Predicament of Medicos : If you refer, they may say you referred for "Cut" or because of your incompetence, if you don't, still they may say, what prevented you, when you are not an expert... so Blame it on Doctors... Isn't it ?

Thanks and Regards,

Adv. Rohit Erande.
Pune. ©

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Physician is free to decide whom he/she will serve, except in case of Emergency – Court rejects 2.5 Crore petition against Doctor & Hospital

A Physician is free to decide whom he/she will serve, except in case of Emergency –  Court rejects 2.5 Crore petition against Doctor & Hospital “Its in the interest of Patients that Doctors. should not be dragged to the Court unnecessarily”” – National Commission observed while dismissing the Compliant for damages of Rs.2.5 Crores as it prevents Doctors from discharging their duty to a suffering person who needs their assistance utmost. A Physician is free to decide whom he will serve, save in case of Emergency –  Court rejects 2.5 Crore petition against Doctor & Hospital Case : SUMAN TANEJA V/s. METRO HOSPITAL & HEART INSTITUTE & 3 ORS, decided on 02/02/2016. Factual Matrix in nutshell : 1. The Complainant, widow of deceased patient claimed damages to the tune of Rs. Two & half Crores on the ground that her husband who was diagnosed as Inferior Wall Myocardial Infarction (IWMI).did not receive the emergency treatment in Golden Hours.The Doctor ...
Read more

A "Supreme Judgment" with manifold reliefs to Doctors and Hospital : Perhaps the year end gift for Doctors.-Adv. ROHiT ERANDE.©

 The "Supreme Judgment" with manifold reliefs to Doctors and Hospital : Perhaps the year end gift for Doctors.  Adv. ROHiT ERANDE.© a. Non availability of Operation Theatre is not a valid ground to hold Hospital Negligent : b. Non functioning of Machines and Equipments cannot be said to be Negligence. c. It is an incorrect assumption to say that, "since surgery was performed by a doctor, he alone would be responsible for different aspects of the treatment required and given to the patient". d. It is too much to expect from a doctor to remain on the bed side of the patient throughout his stay in the hospital. e. Every death of a patient cannot on the face of it be considered to be medical negligence. f.  In spite of the treatment, if the patient had not survived, the doctors cannot be blamed as even the doctors with the best of their abilities cannot prevent the inevitable g. The doctor cannot be held liable for medical negligence by applying the doctrine of  res ips...
Read more

"MD Medicine Dr. fined Rs.41 lakh for doing pleural tapping test without Sonography, that too in Causality section

"MD Medicine Dr. fined Rs.41 lakh for doing pleural tapping test without Sonography, that too in Causality section " The Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, (MSCDRC) in its recent judgment dated 31/03/2017, gave the verdict against the Doctor, but absolved the Hospital.. Case details - Mr.Prashant Tamhane V/s. P.D. hinduja Hospital and anr. CC No.221 of 2003. http://cms.nic.in/ncdrcusersWeb/GetPdf.do… Facts in short : 1. This is the case of 2002. The wife (since deceased) of the Complainant was admitted in the Hospital after the blood reports revealed symptoms of hepatitis. There she was examined by Dr.Ashit Hegde, the Opponent no.2 Doctor in the present case. At that time he after examining the patient he thought it fit for not admitting the patient. By taking medication she was improving. 2.However after about one month, she had Chest pain and difficulty in breathing. Initial X-ray was normal, but in later X-ray, she was diagno...
Read more